ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Predicting corticosteroid resistance and recurrence in keloids: a machine learning study integrating dermatoscopy and ultrasound.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Keloids are characterized by high recurrence rates and variable responses to intralesional corticosteroid therapy. Objective and non-invasive approaches for predicting treatment response and recurrence remain limited. This study aimed to develop and validate machine learning models integrating dermatoscopic and high-frequency ultrasound features for individualized risk stratification in patients with keloids. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, 174 patients with keloids from the internal cohort and an independent external validation cohort of 30 patients were included. Dermatoscopic vascular patterns and ultrasound-derived lesion characteristics were analyzed. Four machine learning algorithms, including Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Naive Bayes (NB), and XGBoost, were developed to predict corticosteroid treatment response and recurrence risk. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, calibration analysis, and decision curve analysis. Results: For corticosteroid response prediction, the RF model achieved the highest discrimination performance (AUC = 0.816, 95% CI: 0.74-0.88), followed by SVM (AUC = 0.781), NB (AUC = 0.759), and XGBoost (AUC = 0.744). For recurrence prediction, the XGBoost model showed the highest predictive performance (AUC = 0.949, 95% CI: 0.91-0.98). External validation in an independent 30-patient cohort showed comparable discrimination (RF: AUC = 0.851; XGBoost: AUC = 0.855), providing preliminary evidence for model reproducibility. Calibration and decision curve analyses suggested potential clinical usefulness. Conclusions: Machine learning models integrating dermatoscopic and ultrasound features may provide non-invasive approaches for predicting corticosteroid response and recurrence in keloids. These findings support further multicenter validation before clinical implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.